CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

cpp-testing

C++ テストの作成/更新/修正、GoogleTest/CTest の設定、失敗またはフレーキーなテストの診断、カバレッジ/サニタイザーの追加時にのみ使用します。

88

1.22x
Quality

83%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

92%

1.22x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

75%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A well-structured, actionable C++ testing skill with strong executable examples and a clear TDD workflow. The main room for improvement is making validation checkpoints explicit and splitting the longer setup material into reference files.

Suggestions

Add an explicit validation/verify checkpoint in the '失敗のデバッグ' workflow (e.g. 'run the focused test and confirm green before expanding to the full suite') so the feedback loop is stated, not implied.

Replace the malformed FetchContent URL line with a literal HTTPS archive URL (or a GIT_REPOSITORY + GIT_TAG pair) so the CMake quick-start is copy-paste correct.

Consider moving the detailed coverage, sanitizer, and fuzzing/property-testing setups into reference files (e.g. references/coverage.md, references/sanitizers.md) referenced one level deep from the body to improve progressive disclosure.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Largely lean and code-forward with little re-explanation of basics Claude already knows; a few stub disclaimers and inline comments could be trimmed, so it sits just below the top anchor.

4 / 5

Actionability

Mostly executable, copy-paste-ready gtest/gmock/CMake/ctest/coverage/sanitizer code covering common cases, with minor gaps — the UserStore fixture is an explicitly-justified stub and the FetchContent URL line is malformed.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The RED→GREEN→REFACTOR loop and the numbered failure-debugging sequence are clearly ordered with a feedback loop (re-run single test → sanitizers → expand to full suite), but validation checkpoints are implicit rather than called out as explicit verify steps.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized into clearly headed sections with an explicitly-marked optional appendix; no bundle files exist so there are no external references, though detailed coverage/sanitizer/fuzzing material is inlined rather than split into reference files.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

92%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A highly specific, well-scoped description that pairs concrete capabilities with an explicit 'use only when' trigger clause. Minor synonym coverage is the only gap.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — 'テストの作成/更新/修正', 'GoogleTest/CTest の設定', '失敗またはフレーキーなテストの診断', 'カバレッジ/サニタイザーの追加' — giving comprehensive coverage rather than vague abstraction.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' (the enumerated test/CI actions) and 'when' via the concrete trigger clause '〜時にのみ使用します', matching the top anchor.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Strong natural terms users would say ('C++ テスト', 'GoogleTest', 'CTest', 'フレーキー', 'カバレッジ', 'サニタイザー'), but a few common synonyms (e.g. 'ユニットテスト', 'モック') are absent, keeping it just below comprehensive.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A clear C++ testing niche scoped to GoogleTest/CTest, coverage, and sanitizers with distinct triggers and minimal overlap with unrelated skills.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
affaan-m/ECC
Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.